Hi Miao, a few comments, rest snipped...
> > Section 1.1: shouldn't it simply refer to -protocol for terms > > defined there? I think it makes it more consistent. > > Agree, so we should only leave "TLS client" and "TLS server" to be > define in > Syslog/TLS darft, right? That is my suggestion... > > Section 4.2: > > > > === > > Authentication in > > this specification means that the recipient of a certificate must > > actually validate the certificate rather than just accept a > > certificate. > > === > > > > Is this "must" intentionally in lower case? If so, is this plausible? > > Yes, intentionally. IMHO it is confusing if you use "must" in a non-normative way. If I were to implement it (and did not know about this discussion), I'd wonder if I "MUST" validate ... or if the "must" is a suggestion, like a "SHOULD". Why not use "SHOULD" in the first place? Rainer _______________________________________________ Syslog mailing list Syslog@lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
